The St. Johns herald., 1887-12-15

not the taxing power be dismantled of the essential habiliments of soy. ereignty? Whence would cofne the territorial revenues-the life-blood of the territorial government and the great lubricator of it's machin- cry? Would not such a govern ment perish, divested thus of it's vital resources? Here we appre- bend Is one reason of the law that the most liberal intendments and the strongest presumptions will be indulged in favor of the right of taxation. Here, too, is correla- tive reason of the law-that, in construing legislative exemptions from taxation, there are no pre- sumptions, no intendments. no i'm plicatiOns, nothing, save what the very terms of the statute creating the exemption irresistibly import. Under this rule does not the Mon- tana decision go too far? Now, Judge Cooley, on page 2O4 of his great work on taxation, says: "Tax- ation is the rule-exemption the exception" Mir. Welty on assess ments lays down this doctrine that where exemptions from taxation by legislative enactment is claimed, the act creating the exemption must be strictly construed. Way back in the case of the Philadelphia & Wilmington railroad vs. Maryland, 10 Howard, 376, Chief Justice Tan ey used the following language |: "This court on several occasions has held, that the taxing power of a state is never presumed to be re- linquished, unless the intention to relinquish is declared in clear and unambigious terms" At a still earlier date-4th Peters, 514, in case that became famous by reason of the great opinion of Chief Jus tice Marshall, viz: "The Providence Bank vs. Billings"-these words are used: "that the taxing power is of vital importance; that it is essen tial to the existence of government, are truths which it cannot be neces- sary to affirm. We must look for the exemption in the language of the instrument; and if we do not find it there, it would be going very far to insert 1t by construction" If we look to the language of the sec ond section of plaintiffs charter exempting it from taxation, what is exempt besides the right of way? So in 116 U. s 665, Railroad Co. vs. Damis. Mir. Justice Gray, speak ing for his associates, said "It has been said that neither the right of taxation, nor any other power of sovereignty, will be held by this court to have been surrendered, un- less such surrender is expressed in terms too plain to be mistaken that exemption from taxation will not be assumed, unless the lan- guage is too clear to admit of doubt that nothing can be taken against the state by presumption or infer encea; the surrender when claimed, must be shown by clear, unambig- ious language, which will admit of no reasonable construction consis- tent with the reservation of the power; if a doubt arise as to the intent of the legislature, that doubt must be solved in favor of the state | that state cannot, by ambiguous be deprived of this high est attribute of sovereignty; that any contract of exemption is to be rigidly scrutinized, and never per mitted to extend, either in scope or beyond what the terms of the concession clearly require; j" and that such exemptions are re- garded as 'in derogation of the soy- ereign authority, and of common right, and therefore, not to be ex- tended beyond the exact and cx- press requirements of the grants.